It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Debunking Flat Earth and the Hollow Earth

page: 11
7
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 08:06 AM

Such BS. Your comprehension is terrible.

One last

The horizon is more a circle then a line. Turn through 360 degrees while looking at the horizon.

I won't explain "360" and "degrees", you'll have to find that yourself.

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 08:09 AM
I want to say something about the the flat earth argument. When I read these threads, there are suggestions to look at your text books. There is a lot of throwing out established memes that are taken as fact.

The true beauty of the flat earth movement for many is that for the first time they are throwing out all the established memes and reviewing this through their own eyes, using their own logic, what they can observe,and what they can test. This is the first step for many to view everything with fresh eyes and childlike curiosity. For the first time they do not automatically accept what they are told. They are questioning inconsistencies, they are examining motives, they are uncovering deceit and lies. They are becoming explorers in a world grown stale with the premise that everything is understood.

So ridicule if you like, admittedly there are some flakey folks out there that have not been doing the research and often they are the most in your face. But there is an opportunity for a wonderful adventure if you look into this. Really look into this. I can guarantee you one thing, you will never look at things the same way again, whatever you discover.

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 08:18 AM

Such BS. Your comprehension is terrible.

One last

The horizon is more a circle then a line. Turn through 360 degrees while looking at the horizon.

I won't explain "360" and "degrees", you'll have to find that yourself.

Planes use a horizon to fly level, and straight, that's the point here. Why do you still ignore it?

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 12:10 PM

originally posted by: Marbella

Here are indisputable proofs that Earth indeed is flat;

youtu.be...
That's a joke, right?

They are using GPS to make measurements but they can't explain where the GPS signals are coming from. I laughed pretty hard at that.

originally posted by: Hyperboles

Even if you are flying towards the highest mountain range you are still making downwards correction to maintain your assigned altitude above MSL
Rollie explained it much better than you did. His posts are a bit long but you should really read them because you don't seem to understand what he said and he's right. This is a snippet from his post on page 8 but you should read the entire post:

originally posted by: Rollie83
Because the pressure gradient is roughly the same across the globe, an aircraft configured for level flight high above one point will cross another point, thousands of miles away, at very nearly the same altitude—give or take a couple of hundred feet. In other words, because the atmosphere and its pressure gradient follows the Earth’s curvature, so will an aircraft configured for level flight. There’s no need for the pilot to “dip the nose” or execute any other control input, to compensate for the curvature.

edit on 2018330 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 12:12 PM

originally posted by: pointessa
The true beauty of the flat earth movement for many is that for the first time they are throwing out all the established memes and reviewing this through their own eyes, using their own logic, what they can observe,and what they can test.

Yes, but they are not extrapolating and using critical thinking to get past the overly-simplistic arguments such as "the ocean horizon looks flat" argument. In short what I'm saying is that they are not investigating thoroughly enough and they at not using their critical thinking skills.

They need to take a cue from the ancient Greeks such as Eratosthenes who was noticing shadows and took the logical critical thinking leap to using those shadows to calculate the size of the spherical Earth. Or Archimedes who, as part of his study of water, worked out that surface of the ocean would be a curve with the center of the curve being the center of the Spherical Earth. Or Aristotle who used the positions of stars to determine the Earth was a sphere.

Flat Earthers come up with ad hoc flat-Earth explanations for each various observation; however, their argument falls apart when they try to put together one unified flat-Earth explanation for every observation rather than a series of ad hoc ones....

...For example, their explanation for why the Sun rises and sets at different times all over the Earth (or rises and sets at all!) doesn't explain why the stars in the night sky are shifted depending on what latitude they are viewed. They have an explanation for that difference in positions of the stars, but that then does not agree with the reason the Sun sets at different times depending on where you are. Seasons are explained with yet another separate flat-Earth theory, BUT that explanation of the seasons does not jibe with their expiation for the movement of the Sun, nor does it jibe with the apparent positions of the stars relative to location of the observer.

The Ancient Greek thinkers did a much better job at using critical thinking to figure out a unified explanation for the shape and size of the Earth than the current day flat-Earthers do with their ad hoc explanations.

edit on 30/3/2018 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 12:49 PM

originally posted by: turbonium1

Such BS. Your comprehension is terrible.

One last

The horizon is more a circle then a line. Turn through 360 degrees while looking at the horizon.

I won't explain "360" and "degrees", you'll have to find that yourself.

Planes use a horizon to fly level, and straight, that's the point here. Why do you still ignore it?

Your just deflecting. That is an instrument but it was about the earth horizon.

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 01:50 PM

turboniums1’s been told many times that pilots don’t use the horizon, natural or artificial (attitude indicator), for altitude control anyway. Also that “straight” refers to heading, not altitude, and so it has no relation whatsoever to the horizon. I will say this about him—he doesn’t get confused by facts…because he just ignores them.
edit on 30-3-2018 by Rollie83 because: Corrected punctutation

edit on 30-3-2018 by Rollie83 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 01:56 PM

Flat Earthers come up with ad hoc flat-Earth explanations for each various observation; however, their argument falls apart when they try to put together one unified flat-Earth explanation for every observation rather than a series of ad hoc ones...

Excellent, very well said.

posted on Mar, 30 2018 @ 03:21 PM

He is doing his best to make the Earth's horizon a straight line to prove his case, despite twisting the word origin and other "useless facts".

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 01:22 AM

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

Okay, I'm curious: What DOES hold the moon to the earth?

If it isn' t the equilibrium between gravity and centrifugal force?

Because if you can give a better formula which also explains the movements of all the other planets, galaxies and other bodies in the sky, science might be listening.. That's what science is for, too.
I know you are trying to enlighten turbo. But in orbital mechanics there isnt actually any equilibrium between centrifugal force and gravity. The moon making one revolution every month the centrifugal force is tiny

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 01:24 AM

Simply put rollie is wrong. I certainly wouldn't pick him / her to be my co pilot

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 03:58 AM

originally posted by: Rollie83

turboniums1’s been told many times that pilots don’t use the horizon, natural or artificial (attitude indicator), for altitude control anyway. Also that “straight” refers to heading, not altitude, and so it has no relation whatsoever to the horizon. I will say this about him—he doesn’t get confused by facts…because he just ignores them.

You keep putting words in my mouth. I said the horizon is straight, not curved. As in a straight line.

Let's go over the horizon, and how it's used in flight....

An attitude indicator (AI), also known as gyro horizon or artificial horizon or attitude director indicator (ADI, when it has a Flight Director), is an instrument used in an aircraft to inform the pilot of the orientation of the aircraft relative to Earth's horizon. It indicates pitch (fore and aft tilt) and bank (side to side tilt) and is a primary instrument for flight in instrument meteorological conditions.

The essential components of the indicator are:

"miniature airplane", horizontal lines with a dot between them representing the actual wings and nose of the aircraft.
the center horizon bar separating the two halves of the display, with the top half usually blue in color to represent sky and the bottom half usually dark to represent earth.
degree indices marking the bank angle. They run along the edge of the dial. On a typical indicator, there is a zero angle of bank index, there may be 10 and 20 degree indices, with additional indices at 30, 60 and 90 degrees.
A 45 degree bank turn is made by placing the indicator equidistant between the 30 and 60 degree marks. A 45 degree bank turn is usually referred to as a steep turn.

The pitch angle is relative to the horizon

en.wikipedia.org...

As I said, the horizon is a straight - horizontal - line. Not at all 'curved', which seems odd, if the Earth is actually a curved surface. Horizontal, straight lines are indications of a completely FLAT surface.

"Pitch angle is relative to the horizon"

""miniature airplane", horizontal lines with a dot between them representing the actual wings and nose of the aircraft.
the center horizon bar separating the two halves of the display, with the top half usually blue in color to represent sky and the bottom half usually dark to represent earth."

NOTHING represents any 'curvature' here. Just the opposite, in fact. EVERYTHING represents a flat Earth.
Angle of pitch is relative to the horizon. Which is, of course, a horizontal line. Both the actul horizon, and AI horizon, are horizontal lines. The AI even indicates ground as a flat surface.

Everything indicates being over a flat, level surface. Maneuvers are relative to a flat, level, surface, across both X and Y axes.

So let's continue..

So once more, I'll go over some of your points...

originally posted by: Rollie83
Because the pressure gradient is roughly the same across the globe, an aircraft configured for level flight high above one point will cross another point, thousands of miles away, at very nearly the same altitude—give or take a couple of hundred feet. In other words, because the atmosphere and its pressure gradient follows the Earth’s curvature, so will an aircraft configured for level flight. There’s no need for the pilot to “dip the nose” or execute any other control input, to compensate for the curvature.

Of course, this is where 'curvature' comes in during a flight - not a single instrument!

Obviously, planes just 'follow' the curved surface of Earth, and when the instruments show a flat, level surface, with a horizontal axis, it 'really means' a CURVED surface! Because it's known that the Earth is a sphere, we don't need instruments showing it is curved. Flat will 'represent' curved.

Come on, now. This is just a joke.

Level flight cannot be flown over a sphere, of course.

There is no possible way to represent a flight over a sphere as 'level' flight.

That's why you claim it is a level flight, 'as we measure it' over a sphere. A level flight over a sphere!

Pressure gradients are your magical solution to a plane flying over a sphere, so let's go over it....

Pressure gradients are essentially horizontal 'sections' of our atmosphere, generally speaking.

These gradients are often referred to as 'horizontal pressure gradients'. You forgot to mention that part, for some reason.

So now we have a horizon, horizontal lines representing the horizon, air, and the ground. We have level flight, and horizontal pressure gradients. Sea level for altitudes above sea level. And everything the plane does, or plans to do, during flight, is relying on the horizon, horizontal lines, flat surfaces, sea level, etc.

When you have a curved surface below you, everywhere, the last thing you'd refer to are instruments for flying over a FLAT surface, right?

But since you don't have any instruments on a plane that would actually indicate a curvature, for some strange reason, you need 'level' to mean 'curved'.

Pressure gradients are not going to make planes appear to be flying 'level' over a sphere. Ground has nothing to do with level flight, as I've told you repeatedly.

You still are confused about what I mean by level flight.

Level flight means aerodynamically level - not ground level, or curves you call 'level'.

If a plane ascends up to, say 30,000 feet, and is flying level, at the same 30,000 feet, it is because the plane indicates no ascent, nor descent, in air, of course.

Same thing for a plane at 31,000 feet, or 40,000 feet, or 20,000 feet. Normally, that is.

And so those planes are flying at various altitudes, and various pressure gradients, but - every plane is flying level, at those altitudes

If you are really a pilot, with 35 years of experience, you would know the Earth is flat, or at least, you'd know the Earth appears, at any altitude .....to be entirely flat.

Nobody knew that pressure gradients had such magical powers. I suppose it also requires millions of pressure gradients within the atmosphere, too.

Millions of pressure gradients, layer by layer, stacked up within the atmosphere. Each one is different. And so, level flight means level along one specific pressure gradient, which curves around Earth. Is that about it?

No. The atmosphere does not have millions of pressure gradients stacked up.

Pressure gradients do not have magical powers. A plane flies level in air. Which is a plane not in ascent, or descent.

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 04:31 AM

originally posted by: Rollie83constant datum)

• Level flight is defined exclusively in relation to the Earth, as a constant altitude over a constant datum—typically, MSL. Your description—“level within the atmosphere”—makes no sense, because the atmosphere contains no frame of reference.

Once again, level flight means aerodynamically level flight.

The atmosphere moves horizontally, above Earth. A plane flies level in atmosphere, which moves horizontally, or 'level', above Earth.

When you fly a plane, you encounter those horizontal winds. Cross-winds, tail winds. They are horizontal winds. 'Level' winds, if you will.

A level sea, a level ground, a level atmosphere, a level flight.

originally posted by: Rollie83constant datum)
• You misunderstand what a descent is. In aeronautical terms, a descent is relative only to the Earth (MSL or other . So a level flightpath which follows the Earth’s curvature is NOT a descent, because it does not converge upon that constant datum. The flightpath is LEVEL.

Again, it is NOT a level flightpath.

The ground has nothing to do with flying in a descent towards ground. A descent is NOT relative to curvature.

If a plane is flying level at 30,000 feet, and then it starts to descend, it MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHAT THE SURFACE BELOW IS. A plane could descend over a mountain range, or an ocean, or a canyon. It doesn't matter. The descent is the same, over any surface. It is not relative to the surface below.

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 08:23 AM

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Rollie83constant datum)

• Level flight is defined exclusively in relation to the Earth, as a constant altitude over a constant datum—typically, MSL. Your description—“level within the atmosphere”—makes no sense, because the atmosphere contains no frame of reference.

Once again, level flight means aerodynamically level flight.

The atmosphere moves horizontally, above Earth. A plane flies level in atmosphere, which moves horizontally, or 'level', above Earth.

When you fly a plane, you encounter those horizontal winds. Cross-winds, tail winds. They are horizontal winds. 'Level' winds, if you will.

A level sea, a level ground, a level atmosphere, a level flight.

A pilot (or autopilot) must constantly make tiny adjustments at all times for various reasons (winds, change in air pressure, etc.) when trying to fly level with the horizon, or to keep the artificial horizon instrument level.

So there's no way you can say that pilots never dip their nose; they are constantly making micro movements to the controls to pull the nose up and dip the nose down at all times just to keep the instruments showning level flight.

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 11:26 AM

A pilot (or autopilot) must constantly make tiny adjustments at all times for various reasons (winds, change in air pressure, etc.) when trying to fly level with the horizon, or to keep the artificial horizon instrument level.

So there's no way you can say that pilots never dip their nose; they are constantly making micro movements to the controls to pull the nose up and dip the nose down at all times just to keep the instruments showning level flight.

Soylent, you’re absolutely correct about the adjustments frequently needed. I suppose our friend turbonium1, in his magnificent incoherence, thinks the atmsosphere is some kind or perfect, static, flat layer-cake. Who the heck knows.

I’ll add that the artificial horizon is not used for altitude control, and flying “level with the horizon” is a maneuver performed in instrument conditions (IMC) to simply keep the aircraft upright. In the same conditions, it would aid the precision of turns, for example the gradations on its display shows 30-degree back, 45-degree bank, etc. The human can’t achieve these angles by the seat of the pants, and requires visual reference—natural or artificial.

Your excellent phrase “micro movements” brought memories of flying very small aircraft. I used to have fun with the different ways to correct deviations in altitude. If I wanted to use pitch, I’d ignore the stick/yoke and turn the trim wheel only, with a pinkie. Or I’d goose the throttle up or down by 20 RPM. In the right moments, I could use the vernier setting on the fuel mixture and accomplish the same thing. Sometimes I’d have a passenger adjust his seat fore or aft just a little to change weight distribution, causing a climb or descent, or if alone I could simply lean forward or back in my own seat and leaeve everything else un-changed. In a Piper Cherokee at cruise you can open the little six-inch window on the pilot’s side, and the aircraft will begin a descent!

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 05:05 PM

First off, calling scientific research and evidence memes is absurd, ridiculous, and infantile.

Second, no there is not discovery of deception or uncovering of inconsistencies going on at all!

Third, that "beautiful childlike wonder" you're describing is in actuality a horrifically terrifying demonstration of full grown adults regressing mentally to a point where they lose the ability to comprehend things the average toddler does, like object permanence for instance or that just because you close your eyes doesn't mean that nobody can see you!

The flat earth movement is militant narcissistic ideation from front to back, and there is absolutely no redeeming value to any of it!

It's literally some sort of freaky mind virus that all but destroys every bit of the human cognitive advantage over other organisms!

It's terrifying, destructive, and very very indicative that something is going terribly wrong with humanity right now.

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 05:30 PM
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

They don't actually have to do it anyway because gravity is always drawing you AND EVERYTHING ELSE including the atmosphere in the direction of the center of mass. (aka the center of the earth)

Down is always down no matter where you are geographically because of this, and beyond that these morons need to understand how aerodynamic lift actually works at which point they would realize that in the absence of any other parameters changing other than traveling the 69 or so miles it takes to make a 1 degree change the other factors will in fact shift the nose "down" for you. (Bottom line is down is always down and air pressure feels the same down as the god damn airplane so the nose will follow the curvature without any input which is why pilots don't have to give the control surfaces any input, rather than the earth being flat but yeah...)

Hedging and saying well other micro adjustments are made and then adding in the complication of variable air pressure temperature and etc is just encouraging and supporting the delusion that they may actually be onto something.

Unfortunately most people who don't believe in the flat earth recognize exactly how utterly stupid irrational and completely divorced from reality flat earth belief really is and fail to take any part of this situation seriously.

But, here's the deal, this "movement" actually represents a very deadly serious situation where a completely ridiculous and nonsensical idea is somehow very seriously compromising the cognitive abilities and mental health of a not insignificant percentage of the people who come into contact with this!

If, for whatever reason, you are one of the lucky majority who hasn't had their mental faculties compromised by coming into contact with this phenomena you should instead consider yourself lucky...

Additionally, maybe it's time to start putting some serious thought into how exactly THIS iteration of whatever this phenomena is can be compromising the faculties of so many others...

And what happens if the next strain of whatever this phenomena is proves to be even more successful?

This isn't funny, it's not a joke, and it seriously behooves those of us who value our ability to think rationally and for ourselves to start asking some serious questions.

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 05:50 PM

No Rollie is not wrong, you are introducing multiple layers of completely unnecessary and ultimately counterproductive layers of complication which are very much feeding validation to turbo's delusions!

Simply put assuming you were flying over a 69 mile stretch of land that is the same height above sea level and atmospheric conditions etc were to remain constant for this entire interval you could in fact trim out the plane to dead neutral and fly straight level and at a fixed altitude for the entire 69 miles with zero control input even though "down" will have shifted by one full degree!!!

Yes, we all know that this is a big fat hypothetical!

But it's still conditionally true and demonstrates that you don't need to apply downward correction on your flight controls to maintain constant altitude!

Aka, what this is actually about rather than an epeen measuring contest over who can layer in the most complication to prove they know their stuff!

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 06:44 PM

Extremely well and serious done research and well presented with indisputable evidence! But... most people are in such a deep sleep and/or denial so they don’t even bother to watch it.

youtu.be...

posted on Mar, 31 2018 @ 09:05 PM

top topics

7